Warlords- What is it good for, absolutely nothing ugh!

[Armorydave]

ATI card, worked fine out of the box here. Even the memory leak was not much of a problem. I just restarted the game every couple hours after the polar ice went black. Not only was my copy not defective, it was barely even buggy.

Otherwise just want to agree with Daviddesj and Prof_geoff_tate pretty much across the board.

 

[Zombie69]

That's not what he said: he claimed that all or most people with ATI cards had problems.

I didn't say that. I said that most ATI cards had problems. That doesn't mean that every person using a particular card will have problems just because someone else with the same card does.

 

[DaviddesJ]

I didn't say that. I said that most ATI cards had problems. That doesn't mean that every person using a particular card will have problems just because someone else with the same card does.

This is absolutely false. You wrote, "Actually, most ATI cards, recent or not, didn't work at all." If the card "didn't work at all", that implies that every person with that card was unable to run the game.

Your original statement (in post #256) is completely untrue.

 

[wioneo]

I personally don't use mods. The original game is good enough for me, and I wouldn't want to compromise it in any way. and I don't know how

 

[Zombie69]

Then, what i actually meant was my latter statement. That is, most ATI cards could cause the game not to work at all.

 

[Commander Bello]

What remains in the end, is the fact that at least a significant part of early buyers faced severe problems to get the game running, if they were using ATI-cards.

And we shouldnt't forget that this encompassed almost any ATI-card, so it was not limited to just some outdated cards from a time before say the year 2000.

Anyway, once again the supporters in this thread do their argumentation as follows:
"We assume that an announced feature will work. We don't evaluate it based on current experiences with similar concepts of the same company."

This reminds me of the old discussion about the abolishment of the SoD. It was announced that the deadly strength of the SoD as experienced in C3C would be adressed. The more information prior to release was revealed, the more it became clear that this idea would not work - at least not in the intended way.
Nevertheless, there were big discussions going on. One fraction completely disregarded any facts and based their opinions on their hopes and beliefs, the other fraction tried to express their expectation based on the given information.
Meanwhile, we know that it was the second fraction which was proven to have had the right expectation.

I wouldn't be too astonished to learn that the "believers" will become disappointed once more, as far as the expectations into the WL-expansion are concerned.

 

[armchairknight]

Well, Bello, where you seem to see disappointment and disillusionment, I see something different. Firaxis has released a steady stream of patches that have been distributed free of cost that have not only fixed the unfortunate bugs, but have also significantly improved gameplay by adding great new features like the Marathon game speed and Custom Scenarios, and new map types. You might not like or use these new features, but I do. If Warlords has problems at release, I'm sure they'll be fixed. Just like Civ IV has already been fixed. I'm happy with the way Firaxis has worked with their fan-base during Civ IV's development and how they've supported the game since release.

 

[IglooDame]

I've gotten way beyond $40 worth of entertainment from Civ4, and I expect to get more than $20 worth of entertainment from the Warlords expansion.

 

[hs1611]

Firaxis has released a steady stream of patches that have been distributed free of cost...

Without meaning to either attack or defend Firaxis I have to ask what do you mean "distributed free of cost"? You either get the patches with Games Magazines CDs, which you pay for, or through the Internet, which you pay for. You might have a flat-rate Internet cnonection but I don't. I pay for traffic above a certain amount. Lots of people, some of them CIV players, still have dial-up, 52k connections, paid by the hour. That's not my definition of free of cost. Free of cost would be if I got the patches on CDs through the mail (physical not electronic), sent to me by Firaxis.
I know, I know, you're thinking that no other company does that, it's not commercially viable. I'm not expecting Firaxis to do it either. I'm just saying that that would fit my definition of "free of cost".

 

[King Flevance]

I wouldn't be too astonished to learn that the "believers" will become disappointed once more, as far as the expectations into the WL-expansion are concerned.

Won't ever happen I doubt. If someone can actually be content and pleased with vanilla, they will be the same with warlords.

EDIT:

prof_geoff_tate: I guess you could say that my expectations have been lowered this time around. However, my expectations have only been lowered when it comes to the Firaxis/T2 duo and/or the Civ title while it is under both of these names. As I won't be buying any Civ game for a while upon release because I see no reason to.

 

[Armorydave]

Won't ever happen I doubt. If someone can actually be content and pleased with vanilla, they will be the same with warlords.

In this case "someone" refers to the vast majority of buyers and reviewers. Obviously, they are all insane and Bello is Einstein.

 

[King Flevance]

In this case "someone" refers to the vast majority of buyers and reviewers. Obviously, they are all insane and Bello is Einstein.

Well, if you replace insane with "just happy a civ 4 made it to the shelves" and Einstein with "someone who doesn't merit that any brownie points", then yes.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Without meaning to either attack or defend Firaxis I have to ask what do you mean "distributed free of cost"?

It means that Firaxis doesn't charge you anything to get the patch. You still have whatever costs are associated with downloading it. Just like Firaxis doesn't buy you a computer: you still have to have a computer (buy it or rent it) in order to play the game.

 

[Lance of Llanwy]

All I see are a bunch of whiners who're still miffed they suffered the misfortune of not having their product work straight out of the box, even though Firaxis made every effort to fix it, and was particularly quick with aid on those experiencing problems with ATI cards. You people still can't get over it. You all come here, you all play the game and seem to enjoy it, so you need SOMETHING to complain about. If they had delayed it, you would've whined about that too, in all likelihood. <snip>!

Moderator Action: Flaming - warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[playshogi]

All I see are a bunch of whiners .... <snip>

There are also problems with the MX400 series of Nvidia cards. I can still see floodplain in the fog and in archipelago maps (in particular) half the fog will be revealed depending on how I move my mouse over the map. I have to say that
the above edited quote probably sums up the attitude of Firaxis towards its customers.

 

[Zombie69]

All I see are a bunch of whiners who're still miffed they suffered the misfortune of not having their product work straight out of the box, even though Firaxis made every effort to fix it, and was particularly quick with aid on those experiencing problems with ATI cards. You people still can't get over it. You all come here, you all play the game and seem to enjoy it, so you need SOMETHING to complain about. If they had delayed it, you would've whined about that too, in all likelihood. <snip>

You're completely wrong. I had no problems with my graphics card. However, i do have problems with the game, which haven't been fixed yet, and if it's true that 1.61 was the final patch, won't ever be fixed. And that's definitely a good reason to "whine".

 

[DaviddesJ]

You're completely wrong. I had no problems with my graphics card. However, i do have problems with the game, which haven't been fixed yet, and if it's true that 1.61 was the final patch, won't ever be fixed.

More accurately: won't be fixed for free by Firaxis. They could be fixed in the patch, or conceivably by volunteers using the (free) SDK.

But a Firaxian seems to have said that maybe there will be another patch for vanilla Civ4 after all. I think it's unclear whether their position is "1.61 is the last patch for Civ4" or "1.61 is the last patch for Civ4 until after the expansion comes out." It might be the latter in that after the expansion is ready they will put some effort back into a further patch for Civ4. Or it might not.

 

[armchairknight]

Well, if you replace insane with "just happy a civ 4 made it to the shelves" and Einstein with "someone who doesn't merit that any brownie points", then yes.

Kingie, baby, how cynical and unbecoming.

 

[King Flevance]

In this case "someone" refers to the vast majority of buyers and reviewers. Obviously, they are all insane and Bello is Einstein.

Merely rephrasing the words that had been put in my mouth.

EDIT: If you replace the words as I say, you can see my viewpoint. If you like Civ 4 go ahead. I find it lacking and drab. Almost as if the reason it was left so easily modable was for the players to do the "flavor programming" and them just throwing some default stuff at us.

 

[armchairknight]

Merely rephrasing the words that had been put in my mouth.

EDIT: If you replace the words as I say, you can see my viewpoint. If you like Civ 4 go ahead. I find it lacking and drab. Almost as if the reason it was left so easily modable was for the players to do the "flavor programming" and them just throwing some default stuff at us.

I can respect the wordplay, , but if your beef is with Firaxis, why belittle the customers? Anyhow, happy gaming!